Hey Byron,
Welcome to C.P!!

Ironically I've been studying Holden V8 engines!

I'm familiar with Chevy engines of the era but not a great help with your exact questions.

1968 327, 250 H.P. engines are listed but I've never seen one in person and don't know anyone who has.
Earlier 327, 250 H.P. engines were not low compression and used 283 heads (Power Pack or Witches Hat)

We only had 2 bbl 327's for 1969, no 4 bbl.

For 1968 the base V8 in a Chevy was a 307, but a 327 2bbl in a Canadian Pontiac (full size).

For 1969 the base V8 in a Chevy was a 327 2 bbl, but a 350 2 bbl L65 in a Canadian Pontiac (full size).

The 255 HP 350 4 bbl, LMI, was the base Chevy 350 at the start of the model year but was replaced soon after with the
250 H.P., 2 bbl, L65

The 255 was specifically built to give Chevy a competitive advantage in NHRA Drag Racing.

As far as I know McKinnon heads had "Made in Canada" cast in.

The L48 300 HP, 350, one of my all time favorites, sometimes had unique Made in Canada heads that were Fuellie heads "without" the Camel humps and flowed slightly better.

There are no heads or blocks that were used in both 1968 and 1969 .

Thanks

Randy

-- Edited by GLHS60 on Friday 25th of September 2015 12:24:25 AM

-- Edited by GLHS60 on Friday 25th of September 2015 12:25:14 AM

HK1837 wrote:

---

Thanks Randy

Anything you want to know about Holden engines i'll be able to answer, 

I'm really curious as to why these engines used a front oil pump and a rear distributor??

Those earlier 4BBL 327's (prior to 1968) we got them here in 1966 and 1967 Pontiac and Chevrolet but they were 230hp for 1966 and 240hp for 1967. I have copies of the sales brochures for both of them I think if you are interested. I think they are listed as RPO codes for 1966-1967 US vehicles but never built or only for special use?

These are possibly pickup truck style engines?? I would like to see any Australia brochures from the era!!

I knew the passenger 1969 327's were 2BBL, either 210hp in Camaro or 235hp in Chevy (not sure what is different with these either, both seem to be quoted as 9:1 compression (so 3927185 heads)). They are listed with different 2BBL carbs so maybe one got the smaller 2BBL and the 235hp got a bigger one?

Right, the 210 H.P. used a 283 size 2 bbl and the 235 used the larger 2 bbl, like on the up coming L65.

The engine sent over here for late HK GTS327 is an all McKinnon Industries engine, assembly codes like K1016H (H for Holden!) and cast date on this one is 8K7 - however they have Tonawanda intakes on them - will be because McKinnon weren't tooled for 4BBL intakes at the time.

This brings up another question from me. I understand your vehicles aren't as year specific as ours, eg: HK GTS 327 isn't specifically for say 1968 but a range of production??  H for Holden, nice !!

Note that there was a 4BBL 327 listed for 1969 GMC trucks, this is an 8.5:1 240hp 330ftlb engine. It is in the 1969 GMH Sales brochure. An almost identical 327 is listed as engine option code L30 (different to passenger L30 275hp) in 1968 Chevy C10-C30/K10-K20 documentation.

Not familiar with this one but would certainly be easy to do, AKA COPO

I knew the LM1 was replaced by the L65 in January 1969 or thereabouts but we only got LM1 spec engines - easy to do for Tonawanda though, just whacked on the intake from the L48. GMH actually rated this LM1 at 275hp which I think is closer to correct. GMH did use the 1111150 distributor on them though and 7deg initial advance, as the fuel here was 97 Octane.

As mentioned the 255 H.P. LM1 was specifically created/underrated to compete in NHRA drag racing.

From what I've read too the 1969 style heads were introduced early onto 1968 trucks. Photos of the 1968 truck engines in both sales brochures and Engineering documents show the heads with accessory holes in the ends - these appear to be dated in the first few months of 1968 though.

Never seen a 1968 with accessory bolt holes ??

I'm really interested in what Tonawanda actually made engine wise. My guess is base engines and possibly made those base engines for the rest of the US production. 2400 engines a day in 1968 building lets say only 307 and 2BBL 327 then 2BBL 350 is like over 700000 engines a year! Throw in 6cyl from Flint, big block and higher performance SBC from Tonawanda?? Would be good to find a resource where someone has already nailed it all!

Byron

I saw a Tonawanda history article a while back but forget where. What I do remember is during the era, any engine with a Tonawanda NO 1 decal was considered top notch.

Thanks

Randy

---

Chevrolet did a low-compression (8.75:1) 327 with a 2-barrel for 1967. It was the base and exclusive V8 engine for the Camaro. A low-compression (8.75:1)  4-barrel version rated at 240 gross h.p. was used in the ½, ¾ & 1-ton Chevrolet & Canadian GMC trucks for 1967 & 1968. It was also offered in 1967 in the big cars but only for the Police Cars. That was also used in Australia. For 1968 that engine was a new offering in the civilian full-sized Chevrolets (Biscayne, Bel Air, Impala, Caprice) plus the  Chevelles & Beaumonts as well and was now rated at 250-gross h.p. through the magic of marketing. Meanwhile the Camaro 327 with the 2-barrel (210 h.p.) continued but now was the new base V8 engine in the 1968 Canadian Pontiacs instead of the 307 like Chevrolet. In the big Pontiacs in 1968 the engine was rated at 210 h.p like the Camaro. The Camaro continued to used that 210-h.p. 327 into the 1969 model year, but sometime early in 1969 it was dropped in favor of the 200-horse 307. For 1969 the Canadian Pontiac big cars switched from the 327 2-barrel to the 350 2-barrel rated at 250 gross horsepower.

I hope you are not taking the 1969 Canadian GMC specs from the brochure posted at the Old Car Brochure website; it is wrong as it is actually a 1968 brochure. For 1969 ALL 327s were replaced with 350 versions except for the Camaro base V8 as noted, plus the 327 2-barrel became the new base V8 in the full-size Chevrolet for 1969 (curiously rated at 235-h.p. vs. 210 for the Camaro). Blame that on politics. The optional 255-horse 350 was new for 1969 and was a 9:1 compression 4-barrel. Replacing the 250-horse 327 it was designated LM1 and was offered on Chevelles, Novas, Camaros, big Chevrolets, plus Beaumonts & Acadians. It was dropped mid-year in favor of a 9:1 compression 350 2-barrel known as the L65 that had been the base V8 for Canadian Pontiac big cars since the very start of 1969 production. Literally the LM1 4-barrel and L65 2-barrel were the same engines in every way except for the carburetor & intake manifold, plus the LM1 seemed to get the stronger drivetrain components shared with the high compression L48 while the L65 got the lighter duty components (Saginaw transmissions & 10-bolt rear differentials generally).

In Canada the Mackinnon engines did not come with smog pumps even as an option through 1967; after that they were assigned the same way as in 49-states in the U.S. (California was always the exception).

There were physical differences in some Mackinnon engines, but for the engines in question during the period specified there really were not. I dont know about casting numbers in particular, but functionally what I have said applies.

GLHS60 wrote:

---

Ken, that's one of my favorite automotive movies but the 1962 Bel Air "was" available with a 327 4 bbl !!

Cam, as noted earlier, the 235 H.P. 327 uses a larger 2 bbl than the 210 H.P. version.

Thanks
Randy

---

 Yeah well if the info isn't quite 100%, the delivery sure was!

CdnGMfan wrote:

---

GLHS60 wrote:

---

...
Cam, as noted earlier, the 235 H.P. 327 uses a larger 2 bbl than the 210 H.P. version.

Thanks
Randy

---

 Thanks for the clarification on that point. I was not aware of it, but it doesn't surprise me at all. Remember the 400 Pontiac V8s back in the late 1960s on Firebirds that specifically had a throttle limiting tab in the linkage in order to advertise a lower horsepower rating? Again, it was political, as in GM Corporate politics.

---

Cam I personally don't think the 327, 210 and 235 H.P. ratings were political as they ran different size carbs but I agree the 400 Firebird carb limiter certainly was. Seems like the GTO had to remain the top performance model even though it was heavier.

Something like the 1963 Pontiac 326 engines actually displacing 336 cubic inches.

Or the 270 H.P. 350 having less actual power than the 255 H.P. version. 

Good catch on finding the 1969 GMC brochure is actually a 1968 !!!

Thanks

Randy

CdnGMfan wrote:

---

Chevrolet did a low-compression (8.75:1) 327 with a 2-barrel for 1967. It was the base and exclusive V8 engine for the Camaro. A low-compression (8.75:1)  4-barrel version rated at 240 gross h.p. was used in the ½, ¾ & 1-ton Chevrolet & Canadian GMC trucks for 1967 & 1968. It was also offered in 1967 in the big cars but only for the Police Cars. That was also used in Australia. For 1968 that engine was a new offering in the civilian full-sized Chevrolets (Biscayne, Bel Air, Impala, Caprice) plus the  Chevelles & Beaumonts as well and was now rated at 250-gross h.p. through the magic of marketing. Meanwhile the Camaro 327 with the 2-barrel (210 h.p.) continued but now was the new base V8 engine in the 1968 Canadian Pontiacs instead of the 307 like Chevrolet. In the big Pontiacs in 1968 the engine was rated at 210 h.p like the Camaro. The Camaro continued to used that 210-h.p. 327 into the 1969 model year, but sometime early in 1969 it was dropped in favor of the 200-horse 307. For 1969 the Canadian Pontiac big cars switched from the 327 2-barrel to the 350 2-barrel rated at 250 gross horsepower.

Agree, in Australia we got these 240hp and 250hp engines. However I disagree it is marketing, I reckon the 1967 engines had 75cc chamber heads (for about 8.55:1 compression) and the 1968 engines (at least those we got in Australia) had 69-70cc 290 cast heads for 9:1-9.2:1 compression. My guess is the 210hp 327 engines for 1968 had 293 cast heads (75cc chamber). I still have yet to find conclusive evidence for these statements though other than the heads we got here on the 250hp engines. See my separate post on heads. 

I hope you are not taking the 1969 Canadian GMC specs from the brochure posted at the Old Car Brochure website; it is wrong as it is actually a 1968 brochure. For 1969 ALL 327s were replaced with 350 versions except for the Camaro base V8 as noted, plus the 327 2-barrel became the new base V8 in the full-size Chevrolet for 1969 (curiously rated at 235-h.p. vs. 210 for the Camaro). Blame that on politics. The optional 255-horse 350 was new for 1969 and was a 9:1 compression 4-barrel. Replacing the 250-horse 327 it was designated LM1 and was offered on Chevelles, Novas, Camaros, big Chevrolets, plus Beaumonts & Acadians. It was dropped mid-year in favor of a 9:1 compression 350 2-barrel known as the L65 that had been the base V8 for Canadian Pontiac big cars since the very start of 1969 production. Literally the LM1 4-barrel and L65 2-barrel were the same engines in every way except for the carburetor & intake manifold, plus the LM1 seemed to get the stronger drivetrain components shared with the high compression L48 while the L65 got the lighter duty components (Saginaw transmissions & 10-bolt rear differentials generally).

Yes I was referring to that brochure, it is dated around April 1968 so I thought it was for 1969. I have all the other stuff you mention sorted. The reason the LM1 got Muncie and 12 bolt and the L65 the Saginaw and 10 bolt is probably the rated torque of these engines sit either side of what appears to be the torque limits for these gearboxes and rear axles: 360ftlb for the M20 Saginaw and 350ftlb for the 10 bot rear axle. I get the 360ftlb and 350ftlb from the 1968 Camaro L30 M20 (Saginaw and 12 bolt) and the 1969 LM1 M20 with Muncie and 12 bolt.  

 

 

---

Thanks mate, my comments inside quote above.

HK1837 wrote:

---

CdnGMfan wrote:

---

Chevrolet did a low-compression (8.75:1) 327 with a 2-barrel for 1967. It was the base and exclusive V8 engine for the Camaro. A low-compression (8.75:1)  4-barrel version rated at 240 gross h.p. was used in the ½, ¾ & 1-ton Chevrolet & Canadian GMC trucks for 1967 & 1968. It was also offered in 1967 in the big cars but only for the Police Cars. That was also used in Australia. For 1968 that engine was a new offering in the civilian full-sized Chevrolets (Biscayne, Bel Air, Impala, Caprice) plus the  Chevelles & Beaumonts as well and was now rated at 250-gross h.p. through the magic of marketing. Meanwhile the Camaro 327 with the 2-barrel (210 h.p.) continued but now was the new base V8 engine in the 1968 Canadian Pontiacs instead of the 307 like Chevrolet. In the big Pontiacs in 1968 the engine was rated at 210 h.p like the Camaro. The Camaro continued to used that 210-h.p. 327 into the 1969 model year, but sometime early in 1969 it was dropped in favor of the 200-horse 307. For 1969 the Canadian Pontiac big cars switched from the 327 2-barrel to the 350 2-barrel rated at 250 gross horsepower.

Agree, in Australia we got these 240hp and 250hp engines. However I disagree it is marketing, I reckon the 1967 engines had 75cc chamber heads (for about 8.55:1 compression) and the 1968 engines (at least those we got in Australia) had 69-70cc 290 cast heads for 9:1-9.2:1 compression. My guess is the 210hp 327 engines for 1968 had 293 cast heads (75cc chamber). I still have yet to find conclusive evidence for these statements though other than the heads we got here on the 250hp engines. See my separate post on heads. 

I hope you are not taking the 1969 Canadian GMC specs from the brochure posted at the Old Car Brochure website; it is wrong as it is actually a 1968 brochure. For 1969 ALL 327s were replaced with 350 versions except for the Camaro base V8 as noted, plus the 327 2-barrel became the new base V8 in the full-size Chevrolet for 1969 (curiously rated at 235-h.p. vs. 210 for the Camaro). Blame that on politics. The optional 255-horse 350 was new for 1969 and was a 9:1 compression 4-barrel. Replacing the 250-horse 327 it was designated LM1 and was offered on Chevelles, Novas, Camaros, big Chevrolets, plus Beaumonts & Acadians. It was dropped mid-year in favor of a 9:1 compression 350 2-barrel known as the L65 that had been the base V8 for Canadian Pontiac big cars since the very start of 1969 production. Literally the LM1 4-barrel and L65 2-barrel were the same engines in every way except for the carburetor & intake manifold, plus the LM1 seemed to get the stronger drivetrain components shared with the high compression L48 while the L65 got the lighter duty components (Saginaw transmissions & 10-bolt rear differentials generally).

Yes I was referring to that brochure, it is dated around April 1968 so I thought it was for 1969. I have all the other stuff you mention sorted. The reason the LM1 got Muncie and 12 bolt and the L65 the Saginaw and 10 bolt is probably the rated torque of these engines sit either side of what appears to be the torque limits for these gearboxes and rear axles: 360ftlb for the M20 Saginaw and 350ftlb for the 10 bot rear axle. I get the 360ftlb and 350ftlb from the 1968 Camaro L30 M20 (Saginaw and 12 bolt) and the 1969 LM1 M20 with Muncie and 12 bolt.  

 

 

---

 

Thanks mate, my comments inside quote above.

---

You guys are missing the whole LMI thing history wise!!!

The 1969 only LMI was created to give non SS Camaro's an advantage in NHRA drag racing.

The SS 350 with the wonderful L48 and great styling was the image car, but the LMI with its under rated 255 H.P. in a lighter non SS body with the stronger transmission and axle proved a faster combination at the strip and very durable.

As mentioned it was only produced for a few months but that was enough to make the combo NHRA legal. 

Torque and H.P. ratings aren't necessarily how powerful the engine is but more for identification.

How the engines get refactored by NHRA proves this, eg: 275 H.P. 327 is more powerful than a 300 H.P. 327, but not as powerful as a 300 H.P. 350.

Rant over !!

Thanks

Randy

GLHS60 wrote:

---

HK1837 wrote:

---

CdnGMfan wrote:

---

Chevrolet did a low-compression (8.75:1) 327 with a 2-barrel for 1967. It was the base and exclusive V8 engine for the Camaro. A low-compression (8.75:1)  4-barrel version rated at 240 gross h.p. was used in the ½, ¾ & 1-ton Chevrolet & Canadian GMC trucks for 1967 & 1968. It was also offered in 1967 in the big cars but only for the Police Cars. That was also used in Australia. For 1968 that engine was a new offering in the civilian full-sized Chevrolets (Biscayne, Bel Air, Impala, Caprice) plus the  Chevelles & Beaumonts as well and was now rated at 250-gross h.p. through the magic of marketing. Meanwhile the Camaro 327 with the 2-barrel (210 h.p.) continued but now was the new base V8 engine in the 1968 Canadian Pontiacs instead of the 307 like Chevrolet. In the big Pontiacs in 1968 the engine was rated at 210 h.p like the Camaro. The Camaro continued to used that 210-h.p. 327 into the 1969 model year, but sometime early in 1969 it was dropped in favor of the 200-horse 307. For 1969 the Canadian Pontiac big cars switched from the 327 2-barrel to the 350 2-barrel rated at 250 gross horsepower.

Agree, in Australia we got these 240hp and 250hp engines. However I disagree it is marketing, I reckon the 1967 engines had 75cc chamber heads (for about 8.55:1 compression) and the 1968 engines (at least those we got in Australia) had 69-70cc 290 cast heads for 9:1-9.2:1 compression. My guess is the 210hp 327 engines for 1968 had 293 cast heads (75cc chamber). I still have yet to find conclusive evidence for these statements though other than the heads we got here on the 250hp engines. See my separate post on heads. 

I hope you are not taking the 1969 Canadian GMC specs from the brochure posted at the Old Car Brochure website; it is wrong as it is actually a 1968 brochure. For 1969 ALL 327s were replaced with 350 versions except for the Camaro base V8 as noted, plus the 327 2-barrel became the new base V8 in the full-size Chevrolet for 1969 (curiously rated at 235-h.p. vs. 210 for the Camaro). Blame that on politics. The optional 255-horse 350 was new for 1969 and was a 9:1 compression 4-barrel. Replacing the 250-horse 327 it was designated LM1 and was offered on Chevelles, Novas, Camaros, big Chevrolets, plus Beaumonts & Acadians. It was dropped mid-year in favor of a 9:1 compression 350 2-barrel known as the L65 that had been the base V8 for Canadian Pontiac big cars since the very start of 1969 production. Literally the LM1 4-barrel and L65 2-barrel were the same engines in every way except for the carburetor & intake manifold, plus the LM1 seemed to get the stronger drivetrain components shared with the high compression L48 while the L65 got the lighter duty components (Saginaw transmissions & 10-bolt rear differentials generally).

Yes I was referring to that brochure, it is dated around April 1968 so I thought it was for 1969. I have all the other stuff you mention sorted. The reason the LM1 got Muncie and 12 bolt and the L65 the Saginaw and 10 bolt is probably the rated torque of these engines sit either side of what appears to be the torque limits for these gearboxes and rear axles: 360ftlb for the M20 Saginaw and 350ftlb for the 10 bot rear axle. I get the 360ftlb and 350ftlb from the 1968 Camaro L30 M20 (Saginaw and 12 bolt) and the 1969 LM1 M20 with Muncie and 12 bolt.  

 

 

---

 

Thanks mate, my comments inside quote above.

---

You guys are missing the whole LMI thing history wise!!!

The 1969 only LMI was created to give non SS Camaro's an advantage in NHRA drag racing.

The SS 350 with the wonderful L48 and great styling was the image car, but the LMI with its under rated 255 H.P. in a lighter non SS body with the stronger transmission and axle proved a faster combination at the strip and very durable.

As mentioned it was only produced for a few months but that was enough to make the combo NHRA legal. 

Torque and H.P. ratings aren't necessarily how powerful the engine is but more for identification.

How the engines get refactored by NHRA proves this, eg: 275 H.P. 327 is more powerful than a 300 H.P. 327, but not as powerful as a 300 H.P. 350.

 

Rant over !!

 

Thanks

Randy

 

 

---

Randy

I did pick that up, but it isn't really relevant to us over here and GMH actually rated the engine at 275hp - they must have got that from somewhere. The only difference on ours was the use of the 1111150 dizzy and 7deg intial advance. We only got them as a Powerglide though, the manual cars got the 1969 L48 but with a 1111150 distributor with 2deg of initial advance. It is obvious that the 1969 LM1 has to be more powerful than the 1971 L48 as they are essentially the same engine except a small piston dish used in the 1971 engine to drop compression to 8.5:1. GM rated the LM1 5ftlb higher than the 1971 L48 but rated it 15hp lower - you can see here alone that the torque is probably correct but the power is deliberately understated. It will be the torque figure that triggers the Muncie and 12 bolt though with the LM1 not the power, otherwise the L30 Camaro would have got a Muncie as well. Same happened with the 1971 L48 Camaro, only 270hp (less than L30) but got an M20 Muncie - it will be the 360ftlb of torque that dictated the Muncie. 

Even the 1971-72 L48 engines we got in HQ Holden used the same spec distributor (by that time the number changed from 1111150 to 1111500) and GMH gave these 275hp - probably due to the massive amount of extra advance created by the 1111500 dizzy and the use of 97 Octane fuel.

Byron

GLHS60 wrote:

---

I don't mean to sound argumentative but the H.P. ratings were what served the purpose at the time. Little tune up details were not what made the difference.

You mostly proved this with your LMI at 275 H.P. and the 1971 L48 at 275 H.P. almost the exact same engine as you noted.

Our LM1 at 255 H.P and 1971 L48 at 270 H.P.

While you had a 250 H.P. 327, a 4bbl 350 at 255 H.P. wouldn't make sense but 275 H.P. fits nicely.

You didn't need a 255 H.P. rating but our class racers did, along with the Muncie, after the weak Saginaw the year earlier with the L30. We were dealing with under rated 275 H.P. 340 Darts on the strip!!

As to accessory bolt holes, I'm certain no 1968 engine had them, are you suggesting your 1968 engines did??

I literally owned hundreds of SBC powered vehicles back in the day when labor was cheap and parts expensive. I made extra cash removing any Qjets and intakes, Fuelie heads and any heads with accessory bolt holes. I replaced them all with 283 Power Pack heads and 2bbls and sold the Qjets and Fuelie heads to performance guys and the bolt hole heads to machine shops for cores as they were in high demand so I got to know what I was looking for.

The illustrated engines in the G.M link you provided do appear to show bolt holes but they are renderings not actual pictures.

Strange, our engines are rated at LB/FT of torque but are yours at FT/LB??

Great info on the origins of the Holden V8!! I appreciate the insight although I still have a mental block with the rear mounted distributor. I can't think of another period engine with the oil pump and distributor at opposite ends. The Holden seems to share some design features with the Buick 350 style V8 with it's excellent cylinder heads and crappy front oil pump. Inch for inch the Holden seems very strong power wise!!

What year did you first get Chevy V8's and Holden V8's??

Do any of your Holden cars share any chassis design with any of ours?? Your beautiful Monaro SS 308 seems to have some 1968 Nova styling cues but what type chassis is it built on.

Thanks !!
Randy

---

 Randy

Here are the 1968 Chevy truck brochure pages, not all pages just those with engine pictures.

lbft, ftlb - it is just a US vs British thing. We haven't used imperial figures since the early 70's, everything is metric now. US language seems to drop letters (spelling of Aluminium or metre for example) and do things differently to how the British Empire did (which Australia was part of until 1901).

The 308 made a decent race engine and in 1994 it was also stroked to make a 350ci engine. They were good in the lighter Torana, not so good in the heavier Holden.

I think 1963 we got 283's in full size Chevy. Holden V8 first appeared in 1969. Last Chev in a Holden was late 1974. Last Gen1 SBC's were in 1979-80 C20 and C30 trucks assembled here by GMH. Last Holden branded vehicle with a Small Block "Chev" (although not technically a Chev but a GM Powertrain engine GenII) were the 1998-9 Holden Suburban wagons. The Holden V8 (by then a 304ci engine) ended in mid 2000. By that time (from VTII Commodore onwards) the V8 engines used in Commodore, Monaro, Calais, Holden ute and Statesman were GM powertrain LS1, LS2 and next year will be LS3 engines.

HQ, HJ, HZ, HZ and WB are almost identical to a 1970 onwards Camaro chassis (subframe) wise. We believe the HQ Holden was a cancelled Canadian car, possibly the 1970 Beaumont. It was bought over here, has a SWB sedan, panel van and cab-chassis added and Engineered for Holden engines. Possibly cancelled due to GM taking full ownership of the subsidiaries in 1969 and then selling Chevelles after that? Google HQ Holden and have a look.